Seems like any timeout victory should be a 10 point victory at the very minimum. I might be wrong, but isn't that the minimum amount a victory could be in an normally played game. Making it a 1 point victory is essentially penalizing the winner by at least 9 points.

For example, if I'm REALLY competitive I don't want my opponents to do well in a game OR in ranking. But if I KNOW I am about to lose, rather than giving them the 10 point (minimum victory - could be more) I will only allow them to gain 1 point for a 2 week timeout victory.

The way I think it should work (to be fair to someone dominating a match especially), is that after two weeks, it should end the game as if it were the end of the final turn and points should be awarded the same. If both teams have an equal amount of troops left, then the person last "committed" should win with 10 a point minimum.

Samurai004 wrote:
For example, if I'm REALLY competitive I don't want my opponents to do well in a game OR in ranking. But if I KNOW I am about to lose, rather than giving them the 10 point (minimum victory - could be more) I will only allow them to gain 1 point for a 2 week timeout victory.

Right.
I would recommend giving half of the maximum. This way the abandoner is penalized a good amount and the winner is given points balanced between barely win and perfect win (that the server cannot accurately determine).

An abandoned game should give the maximum possible point gain/loss for the mode. If there's a possibility that abandoning will lead to a lesser penalty than just losing the best outcome in some cases becomes abandoning the game rather than continuining to the end. Abandoned games cause frustration and you can also do some fun things like play the bidding modes, bid high and then abandon if it looks like you're going to lose your high bid later on. You win some high bids and the losses are all abandoned for lower point penalties so the risk/reward of a high bid is suddenly skewed. Finishing games can actually lead you to losing more rank than if you ran away.

Playing to the end should be rewarded (or at least not penalised) in all cases, not just in some or in most.

As goateh says, it has to give the maximum possible score the winner could still theoretically get, either based on game mode or based on the current state of the specific game largely because of how this ELO system takes score into account. Plus that's actually the logical way to go about it - you should never get a better result from abandoning a game than by playing to the end. Anyway having them scored as 1 point is another way to ruin the ELO calculations horribly.

But the server has no way to differentiate an abandon because of likely loss (= forfeit) from an abandon because of a bug, a cheat or a discord.
If it should give the maximum point then it should also provide ways for each side to forfeit, flag as bugged and flag as cheated (technically or morally) - otherwise some players could be mistakenly penalized.

icebrain wrote:But the server has no way to differentiate an abandon because of likely loss (= forfeit) from an abandon because of a bug, a cheat or a discord.
If it should give the maximum point then it should also provide ways for each side to forfeit, flag as bugged and flag as cheated (technically or morally) - otherwise some players could be mistakenly penalized.